I have one last thing. There had been a considerable amount of discussion in the committee in the last Parliament around the issue of going to events, and whether or not this triggers a violation of the code unless one pays. I gather it was a meaningful financial problem. This is not true for me. I'm in a rural constituency. There are no expensive events in rural constituencies of this sort, where you have to pay $200 or $300 to get in. This occurs in urban areas. It was raised by one of our colleagues, who said, “Look, I go because I have to. I would prefer to stay home if I had a choice, and now I have to pay on top of this”.
Keeping that thought in mind, I wonder whether we couldn't make it clear in subsection 14.(1.1) that we are trying to distinguish the admission to the event itself, and say, in that case, that's set aside as a...but food and drink are okay. What I'm trying to do here is to distinguish between events that are typically sporting events, where there's a high admission cost—and that's something where it's reasonable to expect the person should have to pay for it themselves—and other kinds of events, such as going to various cultural community annual fundraising dinners, where there's a high ticket price, as essentially a way of supporting this or that community.